[Norton]

Pretty sure there won’t be any more Pullmors for the same reason no more Pittmans. They cost too much to make even by the Chinese. The ones in the PWC engines are metric too. The parts don’t interchange with the US Pullmors.
There have been attempts to give cruise to Pullmors as they are Universal motors and can run on DC but they are huge current hogs especially when you wire them with a parallel field vs the series field which is how all Pullmors are connected. Can motors don’t have that issue.

Pete

 

[Millstonemike]

Wishful thinking ...

Next step (no pun) in motor evolution would be brushless DC motors. Even a run-of-the-mill economy motor would perform well and last long ... as long as the electronic drive was smart & robust enough not to self destruct on a stall or other malady.

The RC world has been using brushless DC motors for a couple of decades. That market is huge and competitive. It has pushed the envelope on high quality, low cost brushless motor products.

I would presume that the brushless drive electronics adhere to RC standards for servo control. Lionel's control electronics would have to implement that protocol to control a brushless motor system.

 

[gunrunnerjohn]

Odyssey indeed doesn't work for Pulmor motors. Lionel actually was working on an AC motor with cruise, but it was abandoned as too expensive as I recall. Can motors are so cheap, it is hard to justify putting all that research into an open frame motor.

Next step (no pun) in motor evolution would be brushless DC motors. Even a run-of-the-mill economy motor would perform well and last long ... as long as the electronic drive was smart & robust enough not to self destruct on a stall or other malady.

The RC world has been using brushless DC motors for a couple of decades. That market is huge and competitive. It has pushed the envelope on high quality, low cost brushless motor products.

I would presume that the brushless drive electronics adhere to RC standards for servo control. Lionel's control electronics would have to implement that protocol to control a brushless motor system.

I'd love to see brushless motors come to O-scale, that would be really cool! We used them in avionics, the ball bearing brushless motors had ridiculous MTBF figures, they last forever!

 

[superwarp1]

I remember Mike at Train America Studios working on a EOB for open frame motors but couldn’t solve the over heating problem or didn’t want to spend an enormous amount of money on it

 

[KBeyer]

Odyssey indeed doesn't work for Pulmor motors. Lionel actually was working on an AC motor with cruise, but it was abandoned as too expensive as I recall. Can motors are so cheap, it is hard to justify putting all that research into an open frame motor.
I'd love to see brushless motors come to O-scale, that would be really cool! We used them in avionics, the ball bearing brushless motors had ridiculous MTBF figures, they last forever!

Yes, the "Odyssey" motor was announced in the 1998 Heritage catalog as a brushless AC motor. I heard later that they figured out they could achieve the same results with software, so they abandoned the motor project.

 

[Millstonemike]

Yes, the "Odyssey" motor was announced in the 1998 Heritage catalog as a brushless AC motor. ...

Was it an induction motor? Or did Lionel intend to use electronics to drive it?

 

[KBeyer]

Was it an induction motor? Or did Lionel intend to use electronics to drive it?

The 1999 Heritage catalog gives a bit more detail. Apparently it was to be electronically controlled. A number of steam engines were listed as having Odyssey motors. However, no mention of Odyssey is made in subsequent catalogs in 1999 or 2000, instead Pittman motors with flywheels are listed for many locos. Since it states they were testing the motor in actual locos, it's clear they had prototypes made. It'd be interesting to look up the patent application. Even cooler to see some kind of video of operation of the prototype!

 

[Millstonemike]

Doh me, it would have to an electric drive system. Induction motors have very little torque until they come up to speed.

 

[Jetguy]

Was it an induction motor? Or did Lionel intend to use electronics to drive it?

Electronically driven. That was the problem, well that and using old school lamination technology (stray eddie currents cause heating and massive losses) .A brushless motor is typically a polyphase (more than one and mostly 3 phase) motor with permanent magnets. Yes, you can make an induction motor spin at a variable RPM (that exactly what inverter drives or Variable Frequency Drive (VFD) are, used in all kinds of home and industrial solutions. Your home climate control system may be using one as a blower motor. The problem is train requirements have a very specific scenario- stop and begin smooth rotation from a DEAD stop and no cogging. The only way to really achieve that is a sensor based brushless motor control that knows exactly where the rotor is, and typically used a permanent magnet rotor. That way, the controller knows what phase and polarity to fire to move that first tiny bit to take the motor from dead stop to slow rotation. If you don't have a sensor, that first start might actually rotate the rotor backwards from the initial position with a jerk, and then begin forward rotation.

Again, if we want to go down this road- and it's good worthy discussion IMO, lot's of ways to skin that cat.
You can make a polyphase motor, with a rotor that is not permanent magnet. Problem is, then it's not brushless, it's a copy of the modern car alternator where the rotor has a slip ring and brushes.

Converting a Car Alternator into a Motor for an Electric #GoKart #motors

In this video from the Austiwawa YouTube channel, Austin shows how easy it is to turn a car/truck alternator into an electric motor for powering a Go Kart. Austin got his alternator from a Ford F-1…

blog.adafruit.com

You can make an induction motor, but at the scale and size, efficiency and other concerns come into play, and most important, that slow speed performance is likely impacted. And induction motor needs to get current flowing in the rotor before it can begin spinning. That in turn is a delay in responsiveness and again, in a train application, not suitable.
In fact, American Flyer did in fact use an induction motor for one accessory that I am aware of- the talking station. It's actually a shaded pole motor, and specifically, it was used because being an induction motor, it assured it's RPM was tied to the 60HZ ac frequency even at the lower voltage coming out of the transformer to drive it so that the recording would be played at the correct speed even with voltage variations.

There are basically 3 things that have affected the design of modern motors
#1 improvements in permanent magnets- both in overall strength and how "permanent" they are. Early magnets were expensive and not very good at staying magnetized. This is why some HO motors are known to lose magnetism and you can never open them up and break the magnetic field (stuff I learned from reading slot car books in the library when I was a kid- well that and my dad warning me). The lack and cost of magnets, the propensity to lose magnetic strength is why the AC universal motor existed for the most part. Conversely, modern can motors, even brushless RC motors are a result of cheap rare earth magnets that are superior on a level never before previously seen.
#2 Electronics. Simply put, the low cost of electronics in general, the ever better transistors that operate more like a true on off switch at higher and higher speeds, the faster and cheaper microcontrollers using back EMF along with the fast transistors and diodes to turn on and off the coils ever faster and be able to sense back EMF when the coil is off.
#3 Coil technology, specifically the ferrite based cores which handle higher frequency and produce less heating losses and eddy currents than stamped lamination designs. Even laminations when used are better than in the past due to specific alloys and details of the metal used, improved precision manufacturing and so forth.

FWIW, Sunday I put in 3 genuine Pittman swaps to replace Canon motors.
2 of the Milwaukee Road S3 261 traditional black 6-84064 and 260 "Hiawatha" paint scheme version 6-84067
Kansas City Southern 2-10-4 1932740

 

[Jetguy]

Since I was doing motor swaps and had a few motors on the pile, rather than just tell you the differences in words, I took some pictures of various motors I had handy, took them apart to show you the guts and the critical end IMO, the brushes and details around that end of the armature. The 3 motors are 9234E454 (The ones from Ebay that have the encoder that needs cut or machined off), a 9434F827-R1 takeout from a loco, and an MTH Pittman knockoff out of a Premier PS3 engine. This way you can see how much in common these motors are, along with specific details I think are good that make them robust and long lived.
One key aspect is the brushes are soldered to the spring arms in both the 9434 and the MTH copy. This is opposed to the Canon motor where the brush material is pressed into the bush arm and held by the metal tabs gripping the brush material.

Some detail on the specific 9234E454 (The ones from Ebay that have the encoder that needs cut or machined off) and why I think this is the best of all the brush holder systems.

Installed in the motor closeup of armature (Note, this is actually upside down but was trying for a best picture showing the springs and sliding brushes in the holder).

Another key detail is that all 3 motors use a larger non metalic washer at the end of the commutator so that the brushes cannot walk off the shaft and into the bearing area or against a metal shim spacing washer shorting to frame ground.
Last, a final detail is that all Pittman examples I had on hand use aluminum screws to clamp the end bells to the main body, where the MTH copy used steel screws. I'm wondering if Pittman used aluminum to not interfere with the magnetic fields? I minor thing, but again, shows the detail and thought put into these Pittman motors. The reputation is well deserved, they are expensive because they are premium motors and it shows in construction details. The MTH one is a pretty darn close copy, and while there are differences, I think the key details (soldered brushed, proper non metalic washer placement, ball bearings, replaceable and compatible brush assembly with Pittman basic design) are all good thing.

 

[Norton]

Jet, you can verify dimensions but I believe these are the Pittman knockoffs that MTH is now using.
What I found interesting is rated torque is only .0255 Nm (260 gm cm) or just over half what a plain bearing 9434 puts out. This for the 12v 5000 rpm motor.

Dia 38mm DC Permanenr Magnet Motor 12V 24V 2000 3000 4000 5000rpm for DIY Part | eBay

Pete

 

[superwarp1]

Thanks Jetguy, Nicely done.

 

[Jetguy]

Jet, you can verify dimensions but I believe these are the Pittman knockoffs that MTH is now using.
What I found interesting is rated torque is only .0255 Nm (260 gm cm) or just over half what a plain bearing 9434 puts out. This for the 12v 5000 rpm motor.

Dia 38mm DC Permanenr Magnet Motor 12V 24V 2000 3000 4000 5000rpm for DIY Part | eBay

Pete

The MTH one is quite different in actual construction. In other words, no, I don't think the one you specifically linked is what MTH is using, and close looks show a lot of major differences externally which clue in how much might be different internally.

The MTH motor measured dimensions 40mm dia, 61mm long
MTH never quoted specifications or markings. The motor came out of a MTH 20-3584-1 NYC 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine (Cab No. 5316)

Just from the photo of the one you linked, the brush assembly is not compatible with Pittman brush assembly parts so we have no insight to how good or bad that motor is internally.

VS The MTH copy next to a real Pittman

 

[Jetguy]

Again, best bang for the buck until the half off Lionel sale is this motor IMO.

Pittman 9234E454 12VDC 500 CPR Precision Motor - NEW | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Pittman 9234E454 12VDC 500 CPR Precision Motor - NEW at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

There are a couple of sellers as well with this exact model
Pittman 9234E454 12VDC 500 CPR Precision Motor

Key features (some of this is my opinion but tried to show why I think that)
#1 Best brush holder design with shunt wire brushes in a plastic guide holder that is replaceable and compatible with previous Pittman brush assemblies.
#2 12V rating
#3 dual shaft if you need it for a specific locomotive install or cut off if you don't need it.
#4 same basic size as 9434 (40mm dia x61mm long) once the encoder portion is cut off.
#5 dual ball bearings

Again, this motor is part for part compatible with the 9434 series and even if you only swap the brush assembly, at $20, heck, good for parts for other motors.
My sequence is, first I remove the encoder cover (2 screws) then use an allen key bit set to remove the setscrew and the encoder disk from the shaft along with the encoder sensor.
I then use hot glue around the motor shaft to seal the ball bearing from contamination during the cutting process.
A portable metal bandsaw and a vise, I cut off the end of the encoder housing right at the visible parting line in the casting.
I then dress up the edges using a file or a Dremel tool.
With a drop of rubbing alcohol on the edge of the hot glue causes it to break free from the metal. It only takes a drop.

Last, yes, this is longer than the Canon motors. Also the shaft is shorter.
Canon motor is 38mm dia, 55.3mm long, Shaft is basically 14.5mm from the front lip of the bearing
Pittman motors are 40mm dia, 61mm long, 13mm long

Note, the black dot shows exactly where the flywheel setscrew lands on the Canon motor shaft. This in turn barely and I do mean barely hits the end of the 13MM Pitman shaft when installed.

One last note, the original screws used with the Canon motors do not fit the Pittman, they are too small diameter and do not hold. I slightly drilled the motor mount and the plastic flywheel guard to use these Machine Screws, Flat Head, Phillips Drive, #6-32 X 3/8 in, Grade 18-8 Stainless Steel
I chuck them up in a drill (AKA the poor man's lathe) and slightly shave the face of the head while spinning to thin them for clearance and also slightly shave the outer rim of the head diameter. This matches the smaller Canon screws and allows for the encoder ring clearance.

 

[lou1985]

Again, best bang for the buck until the half off Lionel sale is this motor IMO.

Pittman 9234E454 12VDC 500 CPR Precision Motor - NEW | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Pittman 9234E454 12VDC 500 CPR Precision Motor - NEW at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

There are a couple of sellers as well with this exact model
Pittman 9234E454 12VDC 500 CPR Precision Motor
View attachment 565633

Key features (some of this is my opinion but tried to show why I think that)
#1 Best brush holder design with shunt wire brushes in a plastic guide holder that is replaceable and compatible with previous Pittman brush assemblies.
#2 12V rating
#3 dual shaft if you need it for a specific locomotive install or cut off if you don't need it.
#4 same basic size as 9434 (40mm dia x61mm long) once the encoder portion is cut off.
#5 dual ball bearings

Again, this motor is part for part compatible with the 9434 series and even if you only swap the brush assembly, at $20, heck, good for parts for other motors.
My sequence is, first I remove the encoder cover (2 screws) then use an allen key bit set to remove the setscrew and the encoder disk from the shaft along with the encoder sensor.
I then use hot glue around the motor shaft to seal the ball bearing from contamination during the cutting process.
A portable metal bandsaw and a vise, I cut off the end of the encoder housing right at the visible parting line in the casting.
I then dress up the edges using a file or a Dremel tool.
With a drop of rubbing alcohol on the edge of the hot glue causes it to break free from the metal. It only takes a drop.

Last, yes, this is longer than the Canon motors. Also the shaft is shorter.
Canon motor is 38mm dia, 55.3mm long, Shaft is basically 14.5mm from the front lip of the bearing
Pittman motors are 40mm dia, 61mm long, 13mm long

Note, the black dot shows exactly where the flywheel setscrew lands on the Canon motor shaft. This in turn barely and I do mean barely hits the end of the 13MM Pitman shaft when installed.
View attachment 565635
One last note, the original screws used with the Canon motors do not fit the Pittman, they are too small diameter and do not hold. I slightly drilled the motor mount and the plastic flywheel guard to use these Machine Screws, Flat Head, Phillips Drive, #6-32 X 3/8 in, Grade 18-8 Stainless Steel
I chuck them up in a drill (AKA the poor man's lathe) and slightly shave the face of the head while spinning to thin them for clearance and also slightly shave the outer rim of the head diameter. This matches the smaller Canon screws and allows for the encoder ring clearance.

Shush. I've been using that motor frequently in MTH Premier rebuilds. You're going to clue everyone in on it . It's a pretty strong motor. Has more oomph than the standard 9434s used by Lionel and MTH from the factory. I've got a 9234 CPR in a ATSF 5001 class Texas (which I cobbled together from a MTH 5011 class Texas and Lionel parts).

I also put a 9234 CPR in a Premier UP FEF.

My Premier DM&IR M3 Yellowstone has a 9234 CPR as well.

It's great in those locomotives as they are big and heavy, and can use the torque the 9234 CPR. However I also stuck one in a Premier ATSF 3460 class Hudson. The 9234 CPR is a little too strong for it. Motor has enough torque to slip the drivers on it, even with new traction tires, if you accelerate too quickly. The Hudson probably isn't quite heavy enough for this motor.

 

[HARMONYARDS]

Who did you get to machine all those end caps Lou?……😉

Pat

 

[lou1985]

Who did you get to machine all those end caps Lou?……😉

Pat

Some guy in the south east. Sometimes he knows what he's doing, from what I've heard.

 

[86TA355SR]

Now THAT’s funny!

 

[HARMONYARDS]

Some guy in the south east. Sometimes he knows what he's doing, from what I've heard.

All lies,….all lies,….don’t believe what you’ve heard,…😄

Pat

 

[Jetguy]

Just some more detail and theory. The Canon motors appear to come with extra long terminal tabs, and then those are either cut short or bent over before the leads are soldered when Lionel assembles the engine. My theory is, we know a weak point is the plastic being brittle on this endbell, and we have a good photo documentation of a brush holder endbell post being cracked, and while it doesn't even have to be a long bent lead putting that stress, just imagine what could happen either before or during the lead being cut, bent, or soldered by Lionel assembly line workers. If the motor is dropped, or if the cutting process or just leverage on the longer lead snaps that internal post holder, then the brushes can move around and not track true to the armature and as shown, if it hits that metal washer, then that is a shaft short to can motor, which is then a frame short.

Sampling of removed motors, many are cut short, but at least one was a long bent lead variant.

Again, some of the "how" of this broken plastic holder post or tab happening

Which then can short to this metal washer right at the commutator diameter and nothing non conductive in between it and the possible brushes out of alignment.